Why do we Quantify Africa?

[Nanfeishen]

Looking aroung the forum , one comes across various threads refering to Africa, and the most recent being "Why is Africa a Failure?
Reading through the posts one comes across things like, look at the success of countries such as China , India or South Korea, we also encounter look how Germany and Japan grew so rapidly after the war , and, Hong Kong and Singapore were colonies and they managed.
So we have comparisons drawn between certain countries, then comparisons drawn between post-war countries that got rude amounts of money to rebuild, and finally comparisons to cities that were already succesful even before they were de-colonised, to a continent, consisting of over 50 different countries.

Europe is boken up into Eastern, Western and Scandinavia, Asia is normally broken up into The Middle East, the Far East, and SouthEast Asia, America is broken up into North, Central and South, and Australia and New Zealand are normally referred to singularly.
Even then most people break it down even further and normally refer to a particular country, yet somehow we always tend to refer to Africa as Africa, collectively.

Why do we do this?

 

[Fuma]

Looking aroung the forum , one comes across various threads refering to Africa, and the most recent being "Why is Africa a Failure?
Reading through the posts one comes across things like, look at the success of countries such as China , India or South Korea, we also encounter look how Germany and Japan grew so rapidly after the war , and, Hong Kong and Singapore were colonies and they managed.
So we have comparisons drawn between certain countries, then comparisons drawn between post-war countries that got rude amounts of money to rebuild, and finally comparisons to cities that were already succesful even before they were de-colonised, to a continent, consisting of over 50 different countries.

Europe is boken up into Eastern, Western and Scandinavia, Asia is normally broken up into The Middle East, the Far East, and SouthEast Asia, America is broken up into North, Central and South, and Australia and New Zealand are normally referred to singularly.
Even then most people break it down even further and normally refer to a particular country, yet somehow we always tend to refer to Africa as Africa, collectively.

Why do we do this?

Good question. I bet u'll get all the "correct" answers from Anti-Africa. Believe me.

 

[Piepalook]

Looking aroung the forum , one comes across various threads refering to Africa, and the most recent being "Why is Africa a Failure?
Reading through the posts one comes across things like, look at the success of countries such as China , India or South Korea, we also encounter look how Germany and Japan grew so rapidly after the war , and, Hong Kong and Singapore were colonies and they managed.
So we have comparisons drawn between certain countries, then comparisons drawn between post-war countries that got rude amounts of money to rebuild, and finally comparisons to cities that were already succesful even before they were de-colonised, to a continent, consisting of over 50 different countries.

Europe is boken up into Eastern, Western and Scandinavia, Asia is normally broken up into The Middle East, the Far East, and SouthEast Asia, America is broken up into North, Central and South, and Australia and New Zealand are normally referred to singularly.
Even then most people break it down even further and normally refer to a particular country, yet somehow we always tend to refer to Africa as Africa, collectively.

Why do we do this?

It must still be the colonial way of thinking.
You know,.....Dark Africa.....

 

[semiautomatix]

Looking aroung the forum , one comes across various threads refering to Africa, and the most recent being "Why is Africa a Failure?
Reading through the posts one comes across things like, look at the success of countries such as China , India or South Korea, we also encounter look how Germany and Japan grew so rapidly after the war , and, Hong Kong and Singapore were colonies and they managed.
So we have comparisons drawn between certain countries, then comparisons drawn between post-war countries that got rude amounts of money to rebuild, and finally comparisons to cities that were already succesful even before they were de-colonised, to a continent, consisting of over 50 different countries.

Europe is boken up into Eastern, Western and Scandinavia, Asia is normally broken up into The Middle East, the Far East, and SouthEast Asia, America is broken up into North, Central and South, and Australia and New Zealand are normally referred to singularly.
Even then most people break it down even further and normally refer to a particular country, yet somehow we always tend to refer to Africa as Africa, collectively.

Why do we do this?

Well, we in SA (or rather Thabo & Co.) love to refer to SADC. That being the Southern African countries, so there would appear to be attempts to seperate us from the rest of the continent.

By the way, South America and North America are indeed different continents and share a name only, much as in Africa and Europe. South America is always referred to as South America (and possibly Latin America, which neither South nor North America seem to want to claim), so in that, Africa is not alone.

 

[eltherza]

Africa as Africa, collectively.

Why do we do this?

I do it for America... there is America (USA + Canda) with Brazil being the whole of South America regions. Then there is "Russia" part of Asia and then Asia which is china/korean/japan etc to me, EU = everything west that isn't Russian sounding up there. And India is the Indian area (SL, PAK etc)

So it's not unique to Africa. We just use Africa more because we live here.

 

[SlinkyMike]

I do it for America... there is America (USA + Canda) with Brazil being the whole of South America regions. Then there is "Russia" part of Asia and then Asia which is china/korean/japan etc to me, EU = everything west that isn't Russian sounding up there. And India is the Indian area (SL, PAK etc)

So it's not unique to Africa. We just use Africa more because we live here.

Rubbish! (Ok, I suppose if 'you' do it for America, but its still fairly ig'nint)

America = USA = North America (not incl Canada)
Brazil = Brazil
South America = Not North America nor Canada
...etc.

In answer to Nan's Q: unadulterated racism. Racist rhetoric used to equate S.A. to places where black leadership has failed (like Zim for instance).

 

[Nanfeishen]

I do it for America...

I do it for fun and pleasure, but whatever floats your boat

 

[eltherza]

Rubbish! (Ok, I suppose if 'you' do it for America, but its still fairly ig'nint)

America = USA = North America (not incl Canada)
Brazil = Brazil
South America = Not North America nor Canada
...etc.

In answer to Nan's Q: unadulterated racism. Racist rhetoric used to equate S.A. to places where black leadership has failed (like Zim for instance).

You missed my point completely. My point is that I generalize those regions as stated above. I'm not saying it's fact that Brazil is the whole of South America, of course not.

 

[Albereth]

In addition to SADC we also have the Common Monetary Union, Sub-Saharan African, Anglophile and Francophone Africa, Central Afican time, the Great Lakes. There is north, west, east, south, southern, the congo, the sahara, the mahgreb, the sahel, the sudan and guinea.

Lots of ways - but I think when Africa is refered to it is usually in a negative context.

 

[Alan]

In answer to Nan's Q: unadulterated racism. Racist rhetoric used to equate S.A. to places where black leadership has failed (like Zim for instance).

It's used to achievements as well. You can't watch telly for long before you start hearing about African this, African that............

For example Supersport and 'African soccer stars'

 

[sox63]

Looking aroung the forum , one comes across various threads refering to Africa, and the most recent being "Why is Africa a Failure?
Reading through the posts one comes across things like, look at the success of countries such as China , India or South Korea, we also encounter look how Germany and Japan grew so rapidly after the war , and, Hong Kong and Singapore were colonies and they managed.
So we have comparisons drawn between certain countries, then comparisons drawn between post-war countries that got rude amounts of money to rebuild, and finally comparisons to cities that were already succesful even before they were de-colonised, to a continent, consisting of over 50 different countries.

Europe is boken up into Eastern, Western and Scandinavia, Asia is normally broken up into The Middle East, the Far East, and SouthEast Asia, America is broken up into North, Central and South, and Australia and New Zealand are normally referred to singularly.
Even then most people break it down even further and normally refer to a particular country, yet somehow we always tend to refer to Africa as Africa, collectively.

Why do we do this?

I don't know why the global society in general refers to Africa as a collective, but I guess we can all venture a guess.

I'm more inclined to side with SlinkyMike, however I would not say it is racist, but rather ignorant. I had a friend that worked at a call centre that serviced a US customer base, and they would get endless comments from the Americans like "Am I through to Africa!?! I know someone in Lagos, is that South Africa anywhere near there?"

They just don't know or want to know any better.

 

[bwana]

Even then most people break it down even further and normally refer to a particular country, yet somehow we always tend to refer to Africa as Africa, collectively.

Why do we do this?

As far as my professional life goes I'm constantly referring to Sub-Saharan Africa as opposed to Africa in it's entirety.

 

[sox63]

It's used to achievements as well. You can't watch telly for long before you start hearing about African this, African that............

For example Supersport and 'African soccer stars'

I think that ad states "Africa's soccer stars". To me that is different as they come from different countries in Africa. And when they profile someone they state which country they are from.

 

[diesel]

I dunno, but lets blame the gays!

 

[eltherza]

I dunno, but lets blame the gays!

No, you can only do that for earthquakes!

 

[Pixie22]

I talk about Europe all the time =P

anyway, Id say people of the world put Africa in one basket
1-Because alot of them think Africa is a country
2-If they know its a continent they probably cant name 5 countries on it
3-They believe all the countries are pretty much in the same fkd up situation so why seperate them when they have so much in common when it applies to what you are discussing?

They do the same thing with the middle East, and America does it pretty much with every place apart from their own country.

 

[chiskop]

Hehe, I lol'ed the other day reading this post where one company's uselessness (iBurst at that) is blamed on Africa.

 

[PostmanPot]

I don't know why the global society in general refers to Africa as a collective, but I guess we can all venture a guess.

I'm more inclined to side with SlinkyMike, however I would not say it is racist, but rather ignorant. I had a friend that worked at a call centre that serviced a US customer base, and they would get endless comments from the Americans like "Am I through to Africa!?! I know someone in Lagos, is that South Africa anywhere near there?"

They just don't know or want to know any better.

I also worked the phones for an American company once - quite hilarious what the yanks know, or do not know!

I guess some of our own people are just as ignorant.

 

[SlinkyMike]

You missed my point completely. My point is that I generalize those regions as stated above. I'm not saying it's fact that Brazil is the whole of South America, of course not.

Appreciated, however: Don't you struggle sometimes to communicate which actual country you're referring to in this manner?
I must say that I have never heard someone referring to those regions in this fashion.

 

[eltherza]

Appreciated, however: Don't you struggle sometimes to communicate which actual country you're referring to in this manner?
I must say that I have never heard someone referring to those regions in this fashion.

If I wanted to state a country, I'd state the country. If you dont know where it is for example, I'd try to explain "it's by america" ... and if you wanted more detail, a wiki link works wonders.

But most people are victims of generalization, like "America is USA", when in fact North America is USA, Canada, Cuba, Mexico, even Jamaica is in North America, yet most of us think "USA and Canada".

Maybe my thoughts are weird in that regard.